Directive 2010/64 - Right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
Contents
official title
Directive 2010/64/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 October 2010 on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings| Legal instrument | Directive |
|---|---|
| Number legal act | Directive 2010/64 |
| Original proposal | COM(2010)82  |
| CELEX number i | 32010L0064 |
| Document | 20-10-2010 |
|---|---|
| Publication in Official Journal | 26-10-2010; Special edition in Croatian: Chapter 19 Volume 010,OJ L 280, 26.10.2010 |
| Effect | 15-11-2010; Entry into force Date pub. +20 See Art 11 |
| End of validity | 31-12-9999 |
| Transposition | 27-10-2013; At the latest See Art 9 |
26.10.2010 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
L 280/1 |
DIRECTIVE 2010/64/EU OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
of 20 October 2010
on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular point (b) of the second subparagraph of Article 82(2) thereof,
Having regard to the initiative of the Kingdom of Belgium, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Republic of Estonia, the Kingdom of Spain, the French Republic, the Italian Republic, the Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg, the Republic of Hungary, the Republic of Austria, the Portuguese Republic, Romania, the Republic of Finland and the Kingdom of Sweden (1),
After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national parliaments,
Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure (2),
Whereas:
(1) |
The Union has set itself the objective of maintaining and developing an area of freedom, security and justice. According to the Presidency Conclusions of the European Council in Tampere of 15 and 16 October 1999, and in particular point 33 thereof, the principle of mutual recognition of judgments and other decisions of judicial authorities should become the cornerstone of judicial cooperation in civil and criminal matters within the Union because enhanced mutual recognition and the necessary approximation of legislation would facilitate cooperation between competent authorities and the judicial protection of individual rights. |
(2) |
On 29 November 2000, the Council, in accordance with the Tampere Conclusions, adopted a programme of measures to implement the principle of mutual recognition of decisions in criminal matters (3). The introduction to the programme states that mutual recognition is ‘designed to strengthen cooperation between Member States but also to enhance the protection of individual rights’. |
(3) |
The implementation of the principle of mutual recognition of decisions in criminal matters presupposes that Member States have trust in each other’s criminal justice systems. The extent of mutual recognition is very much dependent on a number of parameters, which include mechanisms for safeguarding the rights of suspected or accused persons and common minimum standards necessary to facilitate the application of the principle of mutual recognition. |
(4) |
Mutual recognition of decisions in criminal matters can operate effectively only in a spirit of trust in which not only judicial authorities but all actors in the criminal process consider decisions of the judicial authorities of other Member States as equivalent to their own, implying not only trust in the adequacy of other Member States’ rules, but also trust that those rules are correctly applied. |
(5) |
Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter the ECHR) and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (hereinafter the Charter) enshrine the right to a fair trial. Article 48(2) of the Charter guarantees respect for the right of defence. This Directive respects those rights and should be implemented accordingly. |
(6) |
Although all the Member States are party to the ECHR, experience has shown that that alone does not always provide a sufficient degree of trust in the criminal justice systems of other Member States. |
(7) |
Strengthening mutual trust requires a more consistent implementation of the rights and guarantees set out in Article 6 of the ECHR. It also requires, by means of this Directive and other measures, further development within the Union of the minimum standards set out in the ECHR and the Charter. |
(8) |
Article 82(2)... |
More
This text has been adopted from EUR-Lex.
This dossier is compiled each night drawing from aforementioned sources through automated processes. We have invested a great deal in optimising the programming underlying these processes. However, we cannot guarantee the sources we draw our information from nor the resulting dossier are without fault.
This page is also available in a full version containing the summary of legislation, the legal context, de Europese rechtsgrond, other dossiers related to the dossier at hand and finally the related cases of the European Court of Justice.
The full version is available for registered users of the EU Monitor by ANP and PDC Informatie Architectuur.
The EU Monitor enables its users to keep track of the European process of lawmaking, focusing on the relevant dossiers. It automatically signals developments in your chosen topics of interest. Apologies to unregistered users, we can no longer add new users.This service will discontinue in the near future.